Obama signals "flexibility" on Iraq withdrwal

[AAjax]

Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign is signalling more flexibility on his pledge to quickly pull U.S. troops out of Iraq if elected as part of a move toward the political centre.

Man, if Obama dosent win the election he can sure make some $$ patenting that bicycle with a reverse gear. So yet another turn around from his stated campaign vows, I quess it should be no surprise. This is gonna be one of the biggest loose/loose elections ever.

 

[Corbett]

Obama is turning out to be a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry ever could have been.

 

[SAWYER]

LOL Change

*apologists in 3...2...*

 

[CADsortaGUY]

I applaud his "change" on this subject, it might just show that as he actually gets more real data on the subject he is coming around to a better conclusion.


...or he's just flopping all around trying to be on all sides of the issues. In that case, I suppose we'll hear that his previous statements were "inartful".

 

[ElFenix]

when obama was representing a left wing district in chicago he said he was against the war

when he was representing illinois as a whole he said he agreed with dub about how the war should be conducted (mid 2004)

when he started running for president during the primaries he said pull out (and fast)

now that he's going toward the general he's more flexible

"But he has said over and over again we have to be as careful getting out as George Bush was careless getting in. So he will redeploy our forces responsibly, at a rate that our commanders say is safe and sustainable."

i don't remember him saying that.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Corbett
Obama is turning out to be a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry ever could have been.

Hey as long as he isn't as stupid and careless as George Bush we will be much better off.

 

[Fern]

I've long believed, and said so here, that there is no real difference in Iraq policy between Repubs & Dems. The difference is rhetoric served as red meat for the highly partisan and rabid anti- Iraq *war* types, or the McCain "we'll fight to the bitter end" nonsense. Even back in the early days of the Dem primary, both Obama & Hillary offered remarks in the debates that were worded so lawyerly-like as to offer all kinds of wriggle room.

Anyway, there is a long time between now and Febuary 2009. The wise path is to monitor the changing situation and impliment the appropriate plan come Feb 2009. I cannot fault Obama for recognizing that.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
when obama was representing a left wing district in chicago he said he was against the war

when he was representing illinois as a whole he said he agreed with dub about how the war should be conducted (mid 2004)

when he started running for president during the primaries he said pull out (and fast)

now that he's going toward the general he's more flexible

"But he has said over and over again we have to be as careful getting out as George Bush was careless getting in. So he will redeploy our forces responsibly, at a rate that our commanders say is safe and sustainable."

i don't remember him saying that.

Well a quick google search showed me that he's been saying it from at least May of 2007... so at a minimum more then a year now. He's always spoken for a cautious withdrawal.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Corbett
Obama is turning out to be a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry ever could have been.

I think McCain has that part covered.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Fern
I've long believed, and said so here, that there is no real difference in Iraq policy between Repubs & Dems. The difference is rhetoric served as red meat for the highly partisan and rabid anti- Iraq *war* types, or the McCain "we'll fight to the bitter end" nonsense. Even back in the early days of the Dem primary, both Obama & Hillary offered remarks in the debates that were worded so lawyerly-like as to offer all kinds of wriggle room.

Anyway, there is a long time between now and Febuary 2009. The wise path is to monitor the changing situation and impliment the appropriate plan come Feb 2009. I cannot fault Obama for recognizing that.

Fern

Well agreed. :thumbsup:

 

[soccerballtux]

Why you ask? Because he's not a retard like most lefties.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Why you ask? Because he's not a retard like most lefties.

Statistically improbable: the left aborts our retards, the right elects their's president.

 

[lupi]

Well he is the candidate of change; everything he said to get the nomination gets changed to help get him elected. Shocking and so unexpected.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ElFenix
-snip-

"But he has said over and over again we have to be as careful getting out as George Bush was careless getting in. So he will redeploy our forces responsibly, at a rate that our commanders say is safe and sustainable."

i don't remember him saying that.

Well a quick google search showed me that he's been saying it from at least May of 2007... so at a minimum more then a year now. He's always spoken for a cautious withdrawal.

Yes, I remember him saying that several times. I always thought the part about "being more careful about getting out than GWB was in getting in" was pretty clever.

Fern

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Sawyer
LOL Change

*apologists in 3...2...*

No shit.

This is getting pathetic.

Next up: "Well, maybe a few permanent bases."

:roll:

 

[alphatarget1]

Obama's stance on virtually every issue changes with opinion polls!

Change we can believe in: Obama will change his stance whenever the polls tell him to.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Sawyer
LOL Change

*apologists in 3...2...*

No shit.

This is getting pathetic.

Next up: "Well, maybe a few permanent bases."

:roll:

Hmmm since I am seeing "flip-flopping" on both sides then I hardly call it pathetic.

It looks as though BHO is moving closer to the center, I wish McCain would do the same instead of moving away from the center and more to the fringe.

good ol politics.

 

[StageLeft]

At least he filibustered that Telco immunity like he promised.

Oh, right, no he didn't.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Corbett
Obama is turning out to be a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry ever could have been.

Well, since Kerry wasn't much of a flip flopper at all other than in the lies the Republican marketers put out propaganda for, that the voters fell for, that's not saying a lot.

His biggest flip flop was being 'for' the war in Vietnam when he volunteered, to being 'against' the war after, but that's pretty understandable and he did a lot of good work after the war to help prevent the war from going on indefinitely. It's not every protestor who has the President personally aware of their efforts and appointing someone to counter their efforts.

Do you really need the truth on the 'for the $87B' lie told to you again?

 

[nageov3t]

I believe I was called a cynical maggot when I pointed out there was no way in hell Obama was going to stick with his war rhetoric after the primaries. lol.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I believe I was called a cynical maggot when I pointed out there was no way in hell Obama was going to stick with his war rhetoric after the primaries. lol.

Hey, this campaign is about change, you know?

 

[sportage]

Obama, regardless, is still much better than Mccain, regardless.

I mean, Mccain? Really... Havent we all learned our lesson by now?

How was it GW put it, "you can fool me once, you can fool...
ya cant get fooled again". :laugh:

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Fern
I've long believed, and said so here, that there is no real difference in Iraq policy between Repubs & Dems. The difference is rhetoric served as red meat for the highly partisan and rabid anti- Iraq *war* types, or the McCain "we'll fight to the bitter end" nonsense. Even back in the early days of the Dem primary, both Obama & Hillary offered remarks in the debates that were worded so lawyerly-like as to offer all kinds of wriggle room.

Anyway, there is a long time between now and Febuary 2009. The wise path is to monitor the changing situation and impliment the appropriate plan come Feb 2009. I cannot fault Obama for recognizing that.

Fern

Whatever the situation now, there's a big difference in how they handle the issues regarding the use of military force to begin with.

Repubs have countless 'covert ops' trying to thwart democracy and install who we want for greed policies against the interest of their nation, up to and including organizing assassinations; and unnecessary wars against left-wing leaders as a pattern, among other miitarism. Dems have a whole lot less, though they have Vietnam - with the right pushing at least as hard for that war (the vote was unanimous in the House, and 88-2 in the Senate with the two no's Democrats), not to mention it turned into a war of the Republicans when Nixon expanded it instead of reducing it, and the democrats mostly turned against the war and Republicans continued to back it more.

 

[bamacre]

Wonderful. We have gone from "hey, he's going to be a great President" all the way to, "well, he's still better than McCain."

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: sportage

I mean, Mccain? Really... Havent we all learned our lesson by now?

you could almost say the same about returning to single-party government, though.